Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core 7 240H Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear performance hierarchy between these two mobile processors. The Intel Core 7 240H wins 13 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 5 330 wins 4. The average benchmark score confirms the separation: the Core 7 240H records 31483, while the Core 5 330 records 18345, a gap of roughly 71.7% in favor of the larger chip. The Core 7 240H also sits in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, versus the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 330.

The Core 5 330, however, is not without its merits. It wins the important Cinebench R23 single-core test with a score of 1856 against 1719, a delta of 8%. It also wins PassMark single-thread tests with 4088 versus 3782, an 8.1% advantage. These wins indicate that the newer Wildcat Lake architecture, despite its smaller configuration, delivers superior per-thread performance in certain workloads.

Given the data, the Core 7 240H is the obvious choice for users prioritizing raw multi-threaded throughput, data compression, encryption, and integer math. The Core 5 330 is the selection for workloads where single-thread speed and prime number calculation efficiency are the primary metrics. The Core 5 330 also carries a lower launch MSRP of $309, while the Core 7 240H has a launch MSRP of $502, but the performance data alone, without pricing considerations, shows the Core 7 240H as the dominant overall performer.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest performance gap in the entire dataset appears in the PassMark integer math test. The Core 7 240H scores 80396, while the Core 5 330 scores 33258, resulting in a delta of 58.6% in favor of the Core 7 240H. This is a massive difference that indicates the Core 7 240H is significantly stronger in workloads that rely heavily on integer arithmetic operations.

Data compression shows the second-largest gap. The Core 7 240H scores 271774 in PassMark data compression, versus 145287 for the Core 5 330, a delta of 46.5%. This suggests the Core 7 240H is substantially faster at compression workloads, which often scale with core count and cache size. The Core 7 240H has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, which explains much of this advantage.

The Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows a 43.9% delta, with the Core 7 240H scoring 2360 against 1325 for the Core 5 330. Cinebench R20 multi-core follows with a 35.5% delta, scores of 8562 and 5523 respectively. PassMark random string sorting shows a 38.4% delta, with scores of 28866 and 17771. PassMark multithread shows a 35.5% delta, with scores of 23975 and 15471.

The Core 5 330 fights back in specific areas. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1856 beats the Core 7 240H's 1719, an 8% delta. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4088 beats 3782, an 8.1% delta. The most surprising result is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core 5 330 scores 114 against 102, an 11.8% delta in its favor. This is a notable result because the Core 5 330 has fewer cores and threads, yet it outperforms in this particular algorithmic test.

The Core 7 240H also wins Cinebench R15 single-core with 249 against 186, a 25.3% delta, and Cinebench R20 single-core with 1208 against 779, a 35.5% delta. These wins are interesting because they contrast with the Core 5 330's victories in the R23 single-core and PassMark single-thread tests. The data shows that the two processors trade blows in single-thread performance depending on the specific benchmark version.

Other notable wins for the Core 7 240H include PassMark data encryption, 15155 versus 11076, a 26.9% delta; PassMark extended instructions, 16897 versus 12808, a 24.2% delta; and PassMark floating point math, 58905 versus 43885, a 25.5% delta. PassMark physics shows 1723 versus 1201, a 30.3% delta.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 240H dominates in nearly every multi-threaded and throughput-oriented test. Its 10 cores and 16 threads, combined with 24 MB of shared L3 cache, give it a substantial advantage in data compression, integer math, encryption, and random string sorting. These workloads benefit directly from parallel execution across many threads, and the benchmark results confirm this. The Core 7 240H also wins in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, making it the clear choice for rendering tasks that use these benchmark scenarios.

The Core 5 330 wins in three specific categories: Cinebench R23 single-core, PassMark single-thread, and PassMark find prime numbers. Its 6 cores and 6 threads, while fewer, appear to be more efficient on a per-thread basis in these particular tests. The 3 nm process node and Wildcat Lake architecture likely contribute to this efficiency. The find prime numbers result is particularly interesting, as it shows the Core 5 330 handling a specific algorithmic workload better than the larger chip.

The use-case split is straightforward. Users who run heavily parallel workloads such as video encoding, 3D rendering, data compression, or scientific computing that uses integer math would see better results with the Core 7 240H. Users who run single-threaded applications, legacy software that does not scale across cores, or specific mathematical operations like prime number generation would find the Core 5 330 to be the better performer despite its lower overall benchmark average.

The Cinebench R23 single-core result is worth emphasizing. The Core 5 330's score of 1856 is 8% higher than the Core 7 240H's 1719. In a real-world scenario, this could translate to faster performance in applications that rely on a single primary thread, such as certain database operations or spreadsheet calculations. The PassMark single-thread score of 4088 versus 3782, an 8.1% delta, reinforces this pattern.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H has an average benchmark score of 31483, while the Intel Core 5 330 has an average benchmark score of 18345. The Core 7 240H also sits in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 330.

Q: Does the Core 5 330 win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the Core 5 330 wins 4 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. It wins Cinebench R23 single-core with a score of 1856 against 1719, PassMark single-thread with 4088 against 3782, PassMark find prime numbers with 114 against 102, and the duplicate PassMark single-thread test with the same 4088 score.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in the PassMark integer math test, where the Core 7 240H scores 80396 and the Core 5 330 scores 33258, a delta of 58.6% in favor of the Core 7 240H.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core 7 240H also has a higher base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.20 GHz, while the Core 5 330 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Q: What are the launch MSRP values for these processors?

A: The Intel Core 5 330 has a launch MSRP of $309. The Intel Core 7 240H has a launch MSRP of $502.

Q: Which processor is better for single-threaded workloads?

A: The data shows mixed results. The Core 5 330 wins Cinebench R23 single-core and PassMark single-thread tests. The Core 7 240H wins Cinebench R15 single-core and Cinebench R20 single-core tests. The results depend on the specific benchmark version used.

Architecture Differences

The two processors rely on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The Intel Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is built on a 3 nm process node. The Intel Core 7 240H uses the Raptor Lake-H codename, based on the Raptor Lake architecture, and is built on a 10 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel.

The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The Core 7 240H has 10 cores and 16 threads, indicating that some cores support hyper-threading. The core counts alone explain a significant portion of the multi-threaded performance gap observed in the benchmarks.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 7 240H has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 7 240H's larger L3 cache is a major factor in its data compression and integer math victories.

Memory support also differs. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with a single-channel memory bus, delivering 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Core 7 240H supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a dual-channel memory bus, though no bandwidth figure is recorded for it. The dual-channel configuration provides a structural advantage for memory-intensive workloads.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 330 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core 7 240H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 64 execution units. The Core 7 240H's graphics solution has more execution units, which could matter for GPU-accelerated tasks.

The release dates are notably different. The Core 7 240H was released on December 17, 2024. The Core 5 330 was released on April 15, 2026, making it the newer product. Both are currently listed as active in production.

Specification Differences

The base clock speeds differ significantly. The Core 5 330 runs at 1.50 GHz, while the Core 7 240H runs at 2.50 GHz. The boost clocks also differ, with the Core 5 330 reaching 4.60 GHz and the Core 7 240H reaching 5.20 GHz. The Core 7 240H holds a clear clock speed advantage in both metrics.

Thermal design power (TDP) shows a major difference. The Core 5 330 is rated at 15 W, while the Core 7 240H is rated at 45 W. This indicates that the Core 7 240H draws substantially more power and likely requires more robust cooling solutions. The Core 5 330's lower TDP makes it suitable for thinner, more power-efficient mobile designs.

The socket types are different. The Core 5 330 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core 7 240H uses Intel BGA 1744. These are not interchangeable, meaning the processors are tied to different motherboard or system designs.

PCIe support differs. The Core 5 330 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The Core 7 240H supports PCIe Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The Core 7 240H offers a newer PCIe generation and more lanes, which could affect connectivity options for storage and other peripherals.

Neither processor supports ECC memory. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The market segment for both is mobile, indicating they are designed for laptops and portable devices.

The part numbers are recorded as SAE3G for the Core 5 330 and SRQ6TQ5ML for the Core 7 240H. The release dates show the Core 5 330 as the newer product, released on April 15, 2026, while the Core 7 240H was released on December 17, 2024.